Advertisement

Trust in Automation Among Volunteers Participating in a Virtual World Telehealth Mindfulness Meditation Training Program

  • Valerie J. RiceEmail author
  • Rebekah Tree
  • Gary Boykin
  • Petra Alfred
  • Paul J. Schroeder
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 780)

Abstract

Trust is important in group interactions; however, little is known about trust in wellness-related telehealth training. This study examined self-reported trust in U.S. military active duty and veterans (n = 45) who participated in an 8-week mindfulness course offered in the Virtual World (VW) of Second Life. Participants completed a VW Trust Questionnaire (VWT, measuring relational trust such as communication, confidentiality, and self-representation) and a Trust in Automation Questionnaire (TIA, measuring confidence in system and perceived system security, integrity, dependability, and reliability) post training. Participants reported moderately high levels of TIA and high relational trust (VWT). Higher class attendance was associated with being comfortable speaking in the VW and belief in confidentiality (relational trust). Higher attendance was also associated with higher TIA. These results demonstrate that individuals are more likely to participate in virtual world telehealth interventions, and complete more of their training, when their trust is high.

Keywords

Trust Automation Telehealth Virtual world 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to the service members and veterans who participated in this study, as well as to Baoxia Liu, Jim Hewson, Angela Jeter, Cory Overby, and Jessica Villarreal. This research was supported by the Army Study Program Management Office. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

References

  1. 1.
    Rice, V.J., Alfred, P., Villarreal, J.L., Jeter, A., Boykin, G.: Human factors issues associated with teaching over a virtual world. Proc. Hum. Factors. Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 56, 1758–1762 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hoffman, R.R., Johnson, M., Bradshaw, J.M.: Trust in Automation. IEEE Intell. Syst. 28, 84–88 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee, J., Moray, N.: Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine functions. Ergonomics 35, 1243–1270 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brewster, L., Mountain, G., Wessels, B., Kelly, C., Hawley, M.: Factors affecting frontline staff acceptance of telehealth technologies: a mixed-method systematic review. J. Adv. Nurs. 70, 21–33 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bell, M.W.: Toward a definition of “virtual worlds”. J. Virtual Worlds Res. 1, 2–5 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paul, D.L., McDaniel Jr., R.R.: A field study of the effect of interpersonal trust on virtual collaborative relationship performance. MIS Q. 28, 183–227 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chandra, S., Theng, Y.L., O’Lwin, M., Foo, S.: Exploring trust to reduce communication barriers in virtual world collaborations. In: ICA (2011). https://www.ntu.edu.sg/home/sfoo/publications/2011/2011-ICA_fmt.pdf
  8. 8.
    Gartner Research: Gartner says 80 percent of active internet users will have a “Second Life” in the virtual world by the end of 2011 (2007). https://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/503861
  9. 9.
    Gartner Research: Gartner says 90 percent of corporate virtual world projects fail within 18 months (2008). https://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/670507
  10. 10.
    Jian, J.Y., Bisantz, A.M., Drury, C.G.: Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. Int. J. Cogn. Ergon. 4, 53–71 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pew Research Center: Older Adults and Technology Use (2014). http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/04/03/older-adults-and-technology-use/l
  12. 12.
    Blank, G., Dutton, W.: Age and trust in the internet: the centrality of experience and attitudes toward technology in Britain. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 30, 135–151 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gogan, J., Garfield, M., Baxter, R.: Seeing a patient’s eyes: system trust in telemedicine. In: BLED, p. 33 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Qui, L., Benbasat, I.: Online consumer trust and live help interfaces: the effects of text-to-speech voice and three-dimensional avatars. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 19, 75–94 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bhattacharya, S., Wainwright, D., Whalley, J.: Internet of Things (IoT) enabled assistive care services: designing for value and trust. Procedia Comput. Sci. 113, 659–664 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McKnight, D.H., Cummings, L.L., Chervany, N.L.: Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23, 473–490 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Newell, S., Swan, J.: Trust and inter-organizational networking. Hum. Relat. 53, 1287–1328 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V., Kacmar, C.: Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: an integrative typology. Inf. Syst. Res. 13, 334–359 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature (outside the USA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valerie J. Rice
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rebekah Tree
    • 2
  • Gary Boykin
    • 1
  • Petra Alfred
    • 3
  • Paul J. Schroeder
    • 4
  1. 1.Army Research LaboratorySan AntonioUSA
  2. 2.Inspired eLearningSan AntonioUSA
  3. 3.Pacific Science and Engineering GroupSan DiegoUSA
  4. 4.DCS CorpAlexandriaUSA

Personalised recommendations